August 5, 2010

More On Russia and Global Warming

“Frankly, what is going on with the world’s climate at the moment should incite us all (I mean world leaders and heads of public organizations) to make a more strenuous effort to fight global climate change.”

“…our country has not experienced such a heat wave in the last 50 or even 100 years… I want to say that this is, of course, a severe trial for our country, a great trial indeed. But at the same time, we are not alone in facing these hardships, for other countries too have gone through such trials and, despite all the difficulties, have managed to cope with the situation. … Overall, we need to learn our lessons from what has happened, and from the unprecedented heat wave that we have faced this summer.

None of us can say what the next summer will be like. The forecasts vary greatly.Everyone is talking about climate change now. Unfortunately, what is happening now in our central regions is evidence of this global climate change, because we have never in our history faced such weather conditions in the past. This means that we need to change the way we work, change the methods that we used in the past.”

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

When parts of the US and Siberia-Norther China had record low temps last winter we were told in the following terms:
A local temp reading is not indicative of climate change.
There are always extreme events but these events are unlikely to alter the data showing global warming. etc etc.

Well just think about that with your heat wave, for your info where I am its bl***dy freezing.

Haha touche, you’re right a single cold or warm incident doesn’t signify anything, although it does prove that Russia is very vulnerable to the impact of a warming planet. Let me give you a little more read meat then.

How is that ordinary people like political commentators, with no background in climatology, can tell the world that Global warming is or isn’t a fact.
It use to be we relied on scientists and climate experts to help us decide those issues. Now we are letting guys who spend their whole day sitting in a chair spouting their political and social opinions jump into the scientific arena and tell us why global warming isn’t or is a fact.
I don’t think anyone would pay attention to them if they told us how to cure cancer, right?
So why are we listening to people who say “Gee. It’s hot or cold where I live. That means…..”
How global warming ever got to be a hot political topic is a puzzle.
It’s a matter for scientists to research.
Now everytime there is a cold spell the Anti-global warming crowd says “See. It’s cold. Not Hot. I’m right”
and everytime there is a hot spell the pro global warming armchair experts say “See. It’s hot. Not cold. I’m right
Why don’t we just let the scientist tell us what they think. They may be wrong and they may not all agree but it’s a lot more meaningful than letting a politcal pundit spout his “scientific” observations

Norris, I’d be glad if we did a better job listening to scientists, considering every major scientific body in every developed county in the world has stood behind the scientific consensus that the earth is warming due to greenhouse gases. The sources I just used in my previous comment came from NASA, NOAA, and WMO, all based on findings by climate scientists and meteorologists.

Of course, if that doesn’t do it you could ask the U.S. National Academy of Sciences made up of thousands of climate scientists, that just said

“Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.”

While in my mind there is some doubt that the planet has warmed as much as we are told, since the subject seems to have changed to the question is “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” I would like to comment further.

Observations that the world is getting warmer is almost invariably used as some sort of proof that this “warming” is because of mankind’s fixation with burning fossil fuels.

Now in your reply to me above, forgive me if I am wrong, but it appears that you are immediately trying to prove to me that the “anthropogenic CO2 causes Global Warming” is fact.

Forgive me once again if I humbly point out that observations (and all those links are observations), are not proof of any underlying theory, neither is correlation.

So I warn you that without some facts showing CAUSATION of these OBSERVATIONS that you are showing us, you, and many others, should immediately start questioning : 1. what is causing this climate change 2. can mankind actually do anything about it 3. Should we incurr the catastrophic cost of reducing emissions if we are not even sure what is causing this global warming.

Please if you care to reply to this comment, first search for some empirical evidence that links global warming with anthropogenic CO2.

Well either you didn’t read farther down, or we have a different stand of proof, because I just cited a good number of sources that prove just that. Need I repeat again from the US National Academy of Sciences?

“Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.””

But I’m not wasting any more time with you, given the fact that you don’t trust NASA or the NOAA with temperature measurements. You’re trying to talk causation and observations with me while your head is stuck a mile deep in the sand. There’s no argument, graph, scientific study, or live demonstration I could show you that would change your mind, you’re going to have to figure it out yourself.

“The catastrophic cost of reducing emissions”? I guess you’ve never talked to an economist either(unless they’ve been hired by the UK Telegraph).